emannuel tov. scribal practices

8/14/2019 Emannuel Tov. Scribal Practices

1/324

SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S REFLECTEDIN THE TEXTS FOUND IN THE JUDEAN DESERT


2/324


3/324

SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHES REFLECTEDIN THE TEXTS FOUND IN THE JUDEAN DESERT

EMANUEL TOV

E. J. BRILL


4/324


5/324

DEDICATED TO

THE SCRIBES WHO WROTE THE SCROLLS

AND TO

THE SCHOLARS WHO PUBLISHED THEM


6/324

vi Contents


7/324

Contents vii

CONTENTS

Text Editions xiPeriodicals, Reference Works, and Series xiiiReferences and Sundry Abbreviations xviDiacritical Symbols xviList of Tables xviiPreface xix

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

a. Purpose and Nature of the Description 1 b. Sources 3c. Background of the Documents 5

Chapter 2: Scribes 7

a. Identity, Nature, and Status 7 b. Learning Scribal Skills 13c. Production of Scrolls in the Judean Desert? 14d. Characteristic Features of Individual Scribes 16e. Identification of Scribal Hands 20f. Background of Scribal Traditions 24g. Approaches of Scribes to Their Vorlagen 24h. Autographs? 28i. Identification of the Vorlagen of Qumran Texts? 29

Chapter 3:Writing and Writing Materials 31

a. Papyrus 32 b. Leather 33c. Sheets 36 d. Scrolls 39e. Texts Written on Papyrus 44f. Ink 53g. Writing Implements 55

Chapter 4: Technical Aspects of Scroll Writing 57

a. Ruling, Guide Dots/Strokes 57 b. Opisthographs and Palimpsests 68c. Length and Contents of Scrolls 74d. Dimensions of Sheets 79e. Writing Blocks, Columns, and Margins 82f. The Written Text vis--vis Horizontal and Vertical Ruling 104g. Conventions Used at the Beginnings and Ends of Scrolls 108


8/324

viii Contents

h. Titles of Compositions and Headers of Sections 118i. Uneven Surface, Damage, Repair Stitching, and Patching 122 j. De Luxe Editions 125

Chapter 5: Writing Practices 131

a. Divisions between Words, Small Sense Units (Stichs and Verses),Sections, Poetical Units, and Books 131(1) Word Division 131(2) Indication of Small Sense Units (Stichs and Verses) in Biblical Manuscripts 135(3) Division between Large Sense Units (Sections) 143(4) Division between Poetical Units (Psalms) 163(5) Division between Books in Biblical Manuscripts 165

b. Special Layout and Superscriptions 166c. Scribal Marks and Procedures 178

(1) Section Markers, Almost Exclusively in the Margin, and Other ScribalSystems Pertaining to the Division of the Text into Sections 180

(2) Marks Pertaining to Scribal Intervention, Mainly for the Correction of Errors 187(3) Single Letters in the Cryptic A Script, Mainly Written in the Margin 203(4) Single Paleo-Hebrew Letters Written in the Margin 206(5) Marks, Including Unexplained Signs, Drawing Attention to Matters in the Text 208(6) Marks Written at the Ends of Lines as Line-fillers 209(7) Separation Dots between Words 211(8) Letters and Marks Possibly Numbering Sheets and Units 211(9) Signs for Numerals 212

(10) Appendix: Paratextual Elements in Medieval Masoretic Manuscripts 214d. Special Writing of Divine Names 218e. Errors 221f. Correction Procedures and the Degree of Scribal Intervention 222g. Final and Nonfinal Letters 230h. Notation of Variant Readings and Glosses? 234i. Abbreviations 235

Chapter 6: Scripts 237

a. Square (Jewish) Script 237 b. Writing in the Paleo-Hebrew Script and Its Background 238

(1) Individual Paleo-Hebrew Letters Used as Scribal Markings in the Marginsof Texts Written in Square Characters 238

(2) Divine Names in Paleo-Hebrew Characters in Texts Written in Square Characters 238 (3) Texts Written Completely in Paleo-Hebrew Characters 246

Chapter 7:Special Scribal Characteristics of Some Groups of Texts 249

a. Biblical Texts 250 b. Texts Written in the Paleo-Hebrew Script 254c. Tefillinand Mezuzot 256d. Texts Written on Papyrus 258e. Texts Written in Greek 258f. Pesharim 258g. Texts Written in Cryptic Scripts 259


9/324

Contents ix

Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions 261

a. Common Scribal Practices 261(1) Scrolls Written in the Paleo-Hebrew Script 261 (2) The Qumran Scribal Practice 261 (3) A Possible Scribal School Reflected in the Proto-Masoretic Manuscripts 273

b. Continuation of Scribal Traditions in Documents Inscribedin the Square Script 273

c. Possible Influence from Greek Scribal Practices 273d. Scribal Practices Mentioned in Rabbinic Sources 274

Appendix 1: Characteristic Features of the Qumran Scribal Practice 277

Appendix 2: Papyrus Texts from the Judean Desert 289

Appendix 3: Opisthographs from the Judean Desert 295

Appendix 4: The Greek Texts from the Judean Desert 299

Appendix 5: Scribal Features of Early Witnesses of Greek Scripture 303

Appendix 6: The Hebrew Texts from Masada 317

Appendix 7: Scope and Spacing of the Units in the Biblical TextQuoted in thePesharim 323

Appendix 8: Scribal Features of Biblical Manuscripts 331

Appendix 9:Orthographic and Morphological Features of Texts Written in the Qumran Scribal Practice 337

Bibliography 345

Figures 361

Index I: Ancient Sources 367

Index II: Subjects 386

Illustrations


10/324


11/324

TEXT EDITIONS

TEXTS FROM THE JUDEAN DESERT

All texts are quoted according to their primary edition, which in most cases is the one included the DJD series ( DJD IXXXIX; 19512002). Exact references to the volumes in which thesetexts are published are listed in TovPfann,Companion Volumeand in E. Tov (ed.),The Texts from the Judaean Desert: Indices and an Introduction to theDiscoveries in the Judaean Desert Series(DJD XXXIX; Oxford 2002). In addition, the following editions are used (see further n. below).

1QIsaa ParryQimron, Isaiah; also: Burrows,The Dead Sea Scrolls 1QIsa b Sukenik, Dead Sea Scrolls1QM Yadin,War Scrolland: Sukenik, Dead Sea Scrolls1QHa Sukenik, Dead Sea Scrolls(in parenthesis: column numbers according to

Puech ,Quelques aspects)1QpHab Burrows,The Dead Sea Scrolls, vol. 1; also: Horgan, Pesharim1QapGen AvigadYadin,Genesis Apocryphon1QS Burrows,The Dead Sea Scrolls, vol. 24QEnoch Milik, Enoch 11QpaleoLeva FreedmanMathews, Leviticus 11QTa Yadin,Temple ScrollMasada texts Masada VI

OTHER TEXTS

MT BHS LXX The individual volumes in the Gttingen Septuagint series, when extant.Otherwise the text of LXX is quoted from the edition of Rahlfs,Septuagint .

LXXMS(S) The individual volumes in the Gttingen Septuagint series, when extant.Otherwise the text of the manuscript(s) is quoted from the editions of theCambridge series.

LXXLuc The Lucianic tradition of the LXX (mainlyMSS b,o,c2,e2 according to the siglaused in the Cambridge Septuagint), quoted according to the Gttingen andCambridge editions.

LXX early papyri

For bibliographical details, see Aland, Repertorium.

S The Leiden edition of the Peshitta:The Old Testament in Syriac According tothe Peshit ! ta Version(Leiden 196698).TF M. L. Klein,The Fragment-Targums of the Pentateuch According to their

Extant Sources,vols. III (AnBib 76; Rome 1980).TJ D. Rieder, Pseudo-Jonathan: Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch

Copied from the London MS(Jerusalem 1974).T N A. Dez Macho, Neophiti I , vols. IV (Madrid/Barcelona 196878).TO A. Sperber,The Bible in Aramaic Based on Old Manuscripts and Printed

Texts, vols. IIVa (Leiden 195968).V R. Weber, Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam versionem,vols. 12 (2nd ed.;

Stuttgart 1975).


12/324

xii Text Editions

Sam. Pent (SP) A. Tal, The Samaritan Pentateuch, Edited According to MS 6 (C) of theShekhem Synagogue(Texts and Studies in the Hebrew Language and RelatedSubjects 8; Tel Aviv 1994).

Mas. Soferim(Sof.)

M. Higger, Mskt swprym wnlwwlyh mdrs mskt swprym bV (New York1937; repr. Jerusalem 1970).A. Cohen,The Minor Tractates of the Talmud, Massektoth K ! et ! annoth, 1(London 1965).

Sifre Numbers H. S. Horowitz,Sifre de-Ve Rav(Leipzig 1917).Sifre Deutero-

nomy H. S. Horowitz and L. Finkelstein,Sifre al Sefer Devarim (Deutero-nomy) (New York 1969).


13/324

PERIODICALS, REFERENCE WORKS, AND SERIES

AASF Annales academiae scientiarum fennicaeAB Anchor Bible ABD The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vols. 16 (ed. D. N. Freedman; New York 1992) AbrN Abr-NahrainAHAW Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der WissenschaftenAHDRC Ancient History Documentary Research Centre (Macquarie University,

Sydney)AnBib Analecta biblica ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der rmischen Welt (Berlin/New York) AO Archiv fr Orientforschung AOAT Alter Orient und Altes TestamentAOS American Oriental SeriesASOR Mon American Schools of Oriental Research, Monograph Series ASTI Annual of the Swedish Theological InstituteATAbh Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen BA Biblical Archaeologist BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental ResearchBETL Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensiumBHT Beitrge zur historischen Theologie Bib BiblicaBibOr Biblica et orientalia BIOSCS Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies BJPES Bulletin of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society BJRL Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of ManchesterBK Biblischer Kommentar BSac Bibliotheca sacra BT The Bible TranslatorBWANT Beitrge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament BZ Biblische ZeitschriftBZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft CATSS Computer Assisted Tools for Septuagint StudiesCB Cambridge Bible for Schools and CollegesCBQ Catholic Biblical QuarterlyCBQMS Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series

ConB Coniectanea biblica CRBR Critical Review of Books in Religion DB Dictionnaire de la Bible DBSup Dictionnaire de la Bible, Supplment DSD Dead Sea Discoveries EBib tudes bibliques EncBib Encyclopaedia biblica (Heb.) EncBrit Encyclopaedia Britannica EncJud Encyclopaedia Judaica ErIsr Eretz Israel


14/324

xiv Periodicals, Reference Works, and Series

EstBib Estudios bblicos ETL Ephemerides theologicae lovaniensesFRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments HAR Hebrew Annual Review HAT Handbuch zum Alten Testament

HSM Harvard Semitic MonographsHSS Harvard Semitic Studies HTR Harvard Theological Review HUCA Hebrew Union College AnnualICC International Critical Commentary IDBSup The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, Supplementary Volume IEJ Israel Exploration JournalIOMS The International Organization for Masoretic Studies JANESCU Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JBR Journal of Bible and Religion JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies JDS Judean Desert Studies JJS Journal of Jewish Studies JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies JNSL Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages JQR Jewish Quarterly ReviewJQRSup Jewish Quarterly Review Supplement JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Period JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old TestamentJSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series JSP Journal for the Study of the PseudepigraphaJSPSup Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, Supplement Series JSS Journal of Semitic Studies JTS Journal of Theological StudiesKeH Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament MGWJ Monatschrift fr Geschichte und Wissenschaft des JudentumsMSU Mitteilungen des Septuaginta Unternehmens NAWG Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gttingen NCB New Century Bible NKZ Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift

NTOA Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus NTSup Supplements to Novum Testamentum NTT Nederlands Theologisch TijdschriftOBO Orbis biblicus et orientalisOCD Oxford Classical DictionaryOLA Orientalia lovaniensia analectaOLP Orientalia lovaniensia periodicaOLZ Orientalische LiteraturzeitungOTS Oudtestamentische Studin PAAJR Proceedings of the American Academy of Jewish Research


15/324

Periodicals, Reference Works, and Series xv

PSBA Proceedings of the Society of Biblical ArchaeologyPTS Patristische Texte und StudienQC The Qumran Chronicle RB Revue biblique REJ Revue des tudes juives

RHR Revue de lhistoire des religions RevQ Revue de Qumran SBL Society of Biblical LiteratureSBLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation SeriesSBLMasS Society of Biblical Literature Masoretic SeriesSBS Stuttgarter BibelstudienSBT Studies in Biblical and Cognate StudiesScrHier Scripta hierosolymitanaSCS Septuagint and Cognate StudiesSTDJ Studies on the Texts of the Desert of JudahTAPA Transactions of the American Philological AssociationThZ Theologische ZeitschriftTLZ Theologische LiteraturzeitungTRE Theologische Realenzyklopdie TRu Theologische RundschauTSK Theologische Studien und KritikenTU Texte und UntersuchungenTynBul Tyndale BulletinUF Ugarit-ForschungenVT Vetus TestamentumVTSup Supplements to Vetus Testamentum

WTJ Westminster Theological Journal ZAW Zeitschrift fr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft ZDMG Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlndischen Gesellschaft ZPE Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik


16/324

REFERENCES AND SUNDRY ABBREVIATIONS

See h below See section/paragraph h belowSee ch.8b See chapter 8, section b

See ch.5a3 See chapter 5, section a, paragraph 3Illustr.15 Illustration 15 (indicated by shadowed digits) located at the end ofthis monograph

Figs.6.14 Figures 6.14 located at the end of this monographTABLE 5 Table 5 in this monograph2 BCE/CE Secondcentury before the common era/of the common era4QPsh 12 16 4QPsh, combined fragments 12, line16 (smaller font) 1QS I1 1QS col. I, line1

AMS Accelerated Mass Spectometrych. chapter

col(s). column(s)cr inAPPENDIX 1: single cryptic A letters written in the margincross inAPPENDIX 1: crossing out of letters or words with a linegd inAPPENDIX 1: guide dots/strokesno-gd inAPPENDIX 1: lack of guide dots/strokes pal-el inAPPENDIX 1: clarifying addition (in English translations of ancient sources)

LXX SeptuagintPAM Palestine Archaeological Museum (referring to photographs)S PeshittaSP Samaritan PentateuchT TargumV Vulgate

DIACRITICAL SYMBOLS

a possible letter a probable letter a cancellation dot\ unreadable letteraaa letters crossed out{a} erased letter?a reconstructed letter modern editors correction


17/324

LIST OF TABLES

Chapter 2

1. Changes of hands in Qumran manuscripts 212. Scribes of Qumran manuscripts writing more than one manuscript? 233. Major overlaps of Qumran compositions 26

Chapter 3

1. Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and Nabatean-Aramaic papyri from theJudean Desert (listed from north to south) 44

2. Comparison of Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and Nabatean-Aramaic papyri and leather texts from the Judean Desert (listed from north to south) 45

3. Papyrus fragments found in the Qumran caves 46

4. Documentary papyri from Qumran (?) 475. Nonbiblical Hebrew and Aramaic papyri from Qumran paralleled bycopies on leather 48

6. Well-represented nonbiblical compositions from Qumran not extanton papyrus 48

7. Fragmentary papyri of undetermined nature 508. Compositions known only from papyrus fragments 509. Biblical texts on papyrus 51

Chapter 4

1. Manuscripts ruled with diluted ink 582. Double vertical ruling in Qumran documents 603. Guide dots/strokes indicated in biblical scrolls 624. Guide dots/strokes indicated in nonbiblical scrolls 635. Strokes indicated in the margins of Qumran scrolls 646. Qumran scrolls written according to the Qumran scribal practice which

do not give evidence of guide dots/strokes 657. The position of guide dots/strokes in the Judean Desert Scrolls 668. Opisthographs in which the two sides were written according to the

Qumran scribal practice 729. Palimpsests from the Judean Desert 73

10. Two or more biblical books contained in the same scroll 7511. Reconstructed length of some scrolls from the Judean Desert (meters) 7612. Reconstructed length of different Qumran scrolls of the same composition 713. Length of sheets (cm) 8014. Number of columns per sheet 8115. Number of lines per column and leather height 8416. Scrolls containing 4045 (reconstructed) lines 9217. Inconsistency in the number of lines 9418. Number of lines in different manuscripts of the same composition 9519. Sizes of top and bottom margins (cm) 10020. Large top and bottom margins (cm) 102


18/324

xviii List of Tables

21. Scrolls with partially preserved beginnings 11022. Scrolls whose ends have been preserved in part 11123. Unruled wide margins at the beginnings of scrolls 11324. Ruled wide margins at the beginnings of scrolls 11425. Uninscribed area at the end of scrolls 11626. Titles 11927. Hebrew/Aramaicde luxe editions among the texts from the Judean Desert 12628. Hebrew/Aramaic scrolls of large dimensions that may have beende luxeeditions 129

Chapter 5

1. Internal differences within MT concerning the scope of verses in parallel passages 141

2. Small section units in the Qumran texts 1443. Section units in parallel manuscripts of biblical books 151 4. Section units in parallel manuscripts of nonbiblical compositions 1515. Frequency of section units in codex L 1536. Section units in Lev 1:142:14 1577. Section units in Deut 12:114:22 1588. Manuscripts of poetical texts displaying a stichographic layout 1689. Manuscripts of poetical textsnot displaying a stichographic layout 169

10. Cancellation dots above more than one letter 18911. Cancellation dots above single letters 19012. Cancellation dots/strokes above and below single letters 19113. Letters erased after the placing of the cancellation dots above and

below single letters 19214. Cancellation dots/strokes above and below individual letters and words 19315. Irregular number of cancellation dots 19516. Words or letters crossed out with a line 19917. Employment of number signs in non-documentary texts 21318. Dotted words in MT supported by external evidence 21519. Tetrapunctain the Qumran scrolls 21820. Final letters in nonfinal position 233

Chapter 6

1. Tetragrammata written with Paleo-Hebrew characters 2422. Divine names (Tetragrammata and


19/324

PREFACE

This monograph deals with small details pertaining to scribes. These details are important in theown right for improving our understanding of these scribes and the compositions they copieThey should be added to our storehouse of knowledge relating to the biblical and nonbibliccompositions found in the Judean Desert. At the same time, the various sets of data analyzed this book can sometimes be combined to form a larger field of information contributing to ouunderstanding of the background of specific Qumran compositions and of the transmission of t biblical text in antiquity. The information gathered here may also be relevant to the study of thtransmission of other documents from antiquity, such as ancient Greek literature. I have alslooked at parallels in the ancient Near East, but undoubtedly these parallels can be expanded.

This book has been written over the course of twelve years alongside my editorial work fothe Discoveries in the Judaean Desertseries. My mind was always working at two levels; whenreviewing text editions and examining photographs for this series, I also jotted down notes fmyself concerning matters of special scribal interest. This interest in scribal features goes back my student days when I wrote a seminar paper on the signs used by the Alexandrian grammariAristarchus (c. 217145BCE) for Prof. B. Lifschitz of the Department of Classical Studies at theHebrew University.

It is a pleasant task to thank the main libraries used: the Mount Scopus Library and th National and University Library at the Hebrew University, the Andover Divinity Library and thWidener Library at Harvard University, the Bodleian Library and the library of the SemitiInstitute in Oxford, and the Theologicum in Tbingen. The photographs used to examine theJudean Desert texts are from the valuable PAM (Palestine Archaeological Museum) series at thIsrael Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. Also used were the newer photographs produced by thJerusalem West Semitic Project (Claremont, Calif.). All early Greek biblical papyri that could blocated in the libraries of the Philologisches Seminar in Tbingen and at Macquarie University Sydney, Australia (especially in the Ancient History Documentary Research Centre) wereconsulted.

This book was written over a long period, mainly during brief sabbaticals and research traveI am grateful to all the institutions that provided hospitality and good conditions for research. chronological order they were the Oxford Centre for Postgraduate Hebrew Studies (199495Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam (1999), Sydney University (1999), Harvard Center for JewisStudies (20002001), Tbingen University (2000, 2001), Gttingen University (2002), UppsaUniversity (2003), and the University of Munich (2003). Thanks are expressed to the Alexandvon Humboldt-Stiftung in Germany which, by presenting me with a Forschungspreis, enabledmy work at German Universities.

Various individuals showed an interest in the topic of this monograph and remarked on mearlier papers which lay at the basis of several sections in the book. At the final stage severcolleagues, all of whom are personal friends, were kind enough to read major parts of this bookam especially indebted to R. A. Kraft from the University of Pennsylvania, an authority matters papyrological, who saved me from many an imprecision and also made many valuabsuggestions. Making good use of his recent retirement, he spent countless hours on mmanuscript. I also very much appreciate the insightful remarks of M. Abegg from TrinitWestern University in Langley, B.C., Canada and A. Lange from the University of NortCarolina at Chapel Hill. At an earlier stage, I discussed various issues with J. Strugnell Harvard.


20/324

xx Preface

This book contains thousands of details. Even though it deals with textual criticism, it wou be unusual if this book did not leave some mistakes for the connoisseur. All I can say is thathave done my best to eliminate them.

Several previously published segments of this monograph have been integrated here iimproved versions, sometimes expanded or shortened. In chronological sequence, they are:

The Orthography and Language of the Hebrew Scrolls Found at Qumran and the Origin of These Scrolls,Textus 13 (1986) 3157.

The Textual Base of the Corrections in the Biblical Texts Found at Qumran, inThe Dead Sea Scrolls: FortyYears of Research(ed. D. Dimant and U. Rappaport; Leiden/New York/Cologne and Jerusalem 1992) 299314.

The Qumran Scribal School, inStudies in Bible and Exegesis, Vol. III, Moshe Goshen-Gottstein: in Memoriam(ed. M. Bar-Asher et al.; Heb.; Ramat Gan 1993) 13553.

Glosses, Interpolations, and Other Types of Scribal Additions in the Text of the Hebrew Bible, in Language,Theology, and the Bible: Essays in Honour of James Barr (ed. S. E. Balentine and J. Barton; Oxford: Clarendon,1994) 4066. Revised version:The Greek and Hebrew BibleCollected Essays on the Septuagint(VTSup 72;Leiden/ Boston/Cologne 1999) 5374.

Letters of the Cryptic A Script and Paleo-Hebrew Letters Used as Scribal Marks in Some Qumran Scrolls DSD2 (1995) 33039.

Scribal Practices Reflected in the Documents from the Judean Desert and in the Rabbinic Literature: A

Comparative Study, inTexts, Temples, and Traditions: A Tribute to Menahem Haran(ed. M. V. Fox et al.;Winona Lake, Ind. 1996) 383403.Special Layout of Poetical Units in the Texts from the Judean Desert, inGive Ear to My Words: Psalms and

Other Poetry in and around the Hebrew Bible, Essays in Honour of Professor N. A. van Uchelen (ed. J. Dyk et al.;Amsterdam: Societas Hebraica Amstelodamensis, 1996) 11528.

Scribal Practices Reflected in the Paleo-Hebrew Texts from the Judean Desert,Scripta Classica Israelica 15(1996) 26873.

Scribal Markings in the Texts from the Judean Desert, inCurrent Research and Technological Developmentson the Dead Sea Scrolls: Conference on the Texts from the Judean Desert, Jerusalem, 30 April 1995(ed. D. W.Parry and S. D. Ricks; STDJ 20; Leiden/New York/Cologne 1996) 4177.

The Socio-Religious Background of the Paleo-Hebrew Biblical Texts Found at Qumran, inGeschichte TraditionReflexion, Festschrift fr Martin Hengel zum 70. Geburtstag,IIII (ed. H. Cancik et al.; Tbingen1996) I.35374.

Tefillin of Different Origin from Qumran? in A Light for Jacob, Studies in the Bible and the Dead SeaScrolls in Memory of Jacob Shalom Licht(ed. Y. Hoffman and F. H. Polak; Jerusalem/Tel Aviv: BialikInstitute/Chaim Rosenberg School of Jewish Studies, 1997) 44*54*.

The Scribes of the Texts Found in the Judean Desert, inThe Quest for Context and Meaning, Studies in Intertextuality in Honor of James A. Sanders(ed. C. A. Evans and S. Talmon; Leiden/New York/Cologne 1997) 13152.

Scribal Practices and Physical Aspects of the Dead Sea Scrolls, inThe Bible as Book: The ManuscriptTradition(ed. J. L. Sharpe III and J. Van Kampen; London/New Castle 1998) 933.

The Dimensions of the Qumran Scrolls, DSD5 (1998) 6991.Scribal Practices Reflected in the Texts from the Judean Desert, inThe Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A

Comprehensive Assessment(ed. P. W. Flint and J. C. VanderKam; Leiden/Boston/Cologne 1998) 1.40329.Sense Divisions in the Qumran Texts, the Masoretic Text, and Ancient Translations of the Bible, in

Interpretation of the Bible, International Symposium on the Interpretation of the Bible on the Occasion of Publication of the New Slovanian Translation of the Bible(ed. J. Krasovec; Ljubljana/Sheffield 1998) 12146.

Correction Procedures in the Texts from the Judean Desert, inThe Provo International Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls: Technological Innovations, New Texts and Reformulated Issues (ed. D. W. Parry and E. Ulrich;STDJ 40; Leiden/Boston/Cologne 1999) 23263.

Paratextual Elements in the Masoretic Manuscripts of the Bible Compared with the Qumran Evidence, Antikes Judentum und Frhes Christentum, Festschrift fr Hartmut Stegemann zum 65. Geburtstag(ed. B.Kolbmann et al.; BZNT 97; Berlin/New York 1999) 7383.

Opisthographs from the Judaean Desert, in A Multiform Heritage: Studies on Early Judaism and Christianityin Honor of Robert A. Kraft(ed. B. G. Wright; Atlanta, Georgia 1999) 1118.

The Papyrus Fragments Found in the Judean Desert, in Lectures et relectures de la Bible, Festschrift P.-M. Bogaert(ed. J.-M. Auwers and A. Wnin; Leuven 1999) 24755.

A Qumran Origin for the Masada Non-biblical Texts? DSD7 (2000) 5773.


21/324

Preface xxi

Further Evidence for the Existence of a Qumran Scribal School, inThe Dead Sea Scrolls: Fifty Years AfterTheir Discovery: Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July 2025, 1997(ed. L. H. Schiffman et al.; Jerusalem2000) 199216.

The Background of the Sense Divisions in the Biblical Texts, in Delimitation Criticism: A New Tool in Biblical Scholarship(ed. M. C. A. Korpel and J. M. Oesch; Pericope 1; Assen 2001) 31250.

Scribal Features of Early Witnesses of Greek Scripture, inThe Old Greek Psalter, Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma (ed. R. J. V. Hiebert et al.; JSOTSup 332; Sheffield 2001) 12548.

Scribal Notations in the Texts from the Judaean Desert, inThe Texts from the Judaean Desert: Indices andan Introduction to theDiscoveries in the Judaean Desert Series(ed. E. Tov; DJD XXXIX; Oxford 2002, 32349.

The Copying of a Biblical Scroll, Journal of Religious History26 (2002) 189209.The Indication of Small Sense Units (Verses) in Biblical Manuscripts, in Hamlet on a Hill. Semitic and Greek

Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday (ed. M. F. J. Baasten andW. Th. van Peursen; Leuven 2003) 47386.

The Corpus of the Qumran Papyri, inClimate of Creativity: Semitic Papyrology in Context, Papers from a New York University Conference Marking the Retirement of Baruch A. Levine (ed. L. H. Schiffman; Leiden 2003)85103.

The Text of the Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek Bible Used in the Ancient Synagogues, inThe AncientSynagogue: From Its Origins until 200 C.E.Papers Presented at an International Conference at Lund UniversiOctober 1417, 2001 (ed. B. Olsson and M. Zetterholm; ConBNT 39; Stockholm 2003) 23759.

The Ketiv-Qere Variations in Light of the Manuscript Finds in the Judean Desert,Text, Theology andTranslation, Essays in Honour of Jan de Waard(New York: United Bible Societies, 2004) 18391, forthcoming.

The Writing of Biblical Texts with Special Attention to the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Sefer Moshe: The MosheWeinfeld Jubilee Volume(ed. C. Cohen et al.; Winona Lake, Ind. 2004), forthcoming.

The Special Character of the Texts Found in Qumran Cave 11, inThings Revealed. Studies in Early Jewishand Christian Literature in Honor of Michael A. Stone(ed. E. Chazon and D. Satran; Supplements to JSJ; Leiden2004), forthcoming.

I am ever so grateful to Janice Karnis, who, with her fine feeling for style, form, and formaimproved my manuscript wherever needed.

Special thanks are due to F. Garca Martinez for accepting this monograph in the valuablSTDJ series, and to Royal Brill of Leiden, especially to Mr. Hans van der Meij and Mr. PimRietbroek for a job well done.

Jerusalem, 1 January 2004


22/324


23/324

1

INTRODUCTIONa. Purpose and nature of the description

The documents from the Judean Desert (often named the Dead Sea Scrolls) constitute the largcorpus of texts in non-lapidary scripts providing information regarding scribal habits in earIsrael relating to biblical and nonbiblical texts. These practices may be compared with other texin Hebrew and Aramaic in nonlapidary texts, both those contemporary and earlier, especially tlargecorpora of Elephantine papyri and other Aramaic texts from the fifth and fourth centurieBCE. These two groups of texts are very significant as comparative material for the presenanalysis; among other things, the analysis in ch.8b shows that the texts from the Judean Desertcontinue the writing tradition of the Aramaic documents from the fifth centuryBCE in several practices (seeSUBJECT INDEX, parallels).

The Egyptian Aramaic corpus is significant, as it is extensive and derives from an early perioand provides various relevant parallels. However, the corpus of documents from the JudeDesert is much larger and its scribal habits were far more developed. As such, it constitutes thlargest source of information on scribal habits for Hebrew and Aramaic texts from Israel prior the early Middle Ages, from which time the first documents from the Cairo Genizah derive.

Comparison of these practices with scribal habits of Greek texts from the seventh centuryBCEonwards is mandatory, and is therefore often invoked in this monograph (seeSUBJECT INDEX,parallels). Furthermore, the analysis leads us often to the writing practices of even older cultursuch as ancient Egypt, Ugarit, and Mesopotamia. Obviously, one needs to be careful with succomparisons since the texts produced in these areas were written in different languages and ofton different materials. Equal care needs to be taken in the comparison with the rabbini prescriptions, since they are later than the texts from the Judean Desert and pertain only to twriting of Scripture and sacred documents (seeSUBJECT INDEX, rabbinic literature).

The analysis of scribal practices refers to the following aspects: the copyists and the background (ch. 2 below), writing materials (ch. 3) such as scrolls (3cd), technical aspects of twriting of scrolls such as ruling, the length of scrolls, sheets, and columns (ch. 4). It also referswriting practices (ch. 5), such as divisions between words, small sense units (stichs and verseand larger sense units (sections;5a), the special layout of poetical units (5b), scribal marks (5c),correction procedures (5ef), the scripts (ch. 6), special scribal characteristics reflected in certatypes of texts (ch. 7), and various scribal traditions (ch. 8).

The topics covered in this monograph thus pertain to most aspects of scribal activity, and golittle further, as the production of scrolls is covered as well. Skilled scribes may have beeinvolved in some aspects of this activity, but most probably made use of ready-made writinmaterials. This study pertains mainly to thetechnical aspects of scribal activity, while thediffering scribal approaches are discussed only briefly, for example in ch.2g and as backgroundmaterial to the description of most aspects of scribal activity. The analysis covers only somaspects of the textual transmission of compositions (e.g. ch.2g ), while exegetical approaches andliberties taken by scribes in changing the biblical text are not analyzed at all.

Our description of scribal practices reflected in the documents from the Judean Desert is complete as possible with the publication of these texts almost completed. Yet, the presen


24/324

2 Chapter 1: Introduction

survey can only begin to describe the issues at stake. Each of the scribal features to be mention below deserves a monographic analysis, and since such coverage is not possible in the presecontext, treatment of several features is not exhaustive, while that of others is as complete possible. At the same time, use is made of several helpful partial analyses and descriptions bothers, although they are often based on a limited number of texts, namely those known at thtime of publication.1

The description pertains to several technical aspects of the copying of the texts that arimportant in their own right, but also have implications for wider areas, such as the provenanand background of the Qumran scrolls, the relation between individual manuscripts of the samcomposition, the composition and content of the individual texts, and their textual transmission. Indue course, when all the relevant data on the scribal practices has been recorded, it may b possible to draw conclusions on such general issues as scribal practices and schools (ch.8a) andthe background of many of the scrolls found in the Judean Desert. In the meantime, we have content ourselves with partial conclusions.

For example, the large size of the writing block may be a criterion for the authoritative statuof a scroll, possibly in a certain center or period, and not for all scrolls, since small scrolls weequally authoritative (ch.4e). Further, on the basis of a study of the intercolumnar margins (ch.4g ) and the lack of stitching preceding the first column of 4QSd (4Q258), it appears that themargin before the first column of that scroll is large enough to support the view that thcomposition (starting with the text which runs parallel to 1QS V121) constituted the beginning ofthat manuscript, as several scholars believe. According to some scholars, the understanding of tnature of 4QDeutn (see illustr.15) depends to a great extent on the explanation of the followingfeatures: the spacing in the middle of the lines in col. IV, on the empty line I5, on the ruled,uninscribed lines at the bottom of that column, and on the unusual sequence of the text containin its two surviving sheets (sheet 1 contains Deut 8:5-10, while sheet 2 contains the earlier De5:16:1). All these features can be compared with similar phenomena in other texts.

Likewise, the only segment in the texts from the Judean Desert which was subdivided intsmall sections is Isa 61:1062:9 in 1QIsaa. In that pericope, small spaces are indicated after each

1 Especially helpful are the following monographs listed in chronological order: C. Kuhl, Schreibereigentmlich-keiteBemerkungen zur Jesaja-rolle (DSIa),VT 2 (1952) 30733 [henceforth: Kuhl, Schreibereigentmlich-keiten]; M.Martin, The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls III (Bibliothque du Muson 44, 45; Louvain 1958[henceforth: Martin,Scribal Character ])this extremely detailed study is based only on the major texts from cave 1; H.Stegemann, KURIOS O QEOSund KURIOS IHSOUS : Aufkommen und Ausbreitung des religisen Gebrauchs von KURIOS und seine Verwendung im Neuen Testament(Habili tation sschrift, Bonn 1969 [henceforth: Stegemann, KURIOS ]); J. P. Siegel,Final Mem in Medial Position and Medial Mem in Final Position in 11QPsa: Some Observations, RevQ 7 (1969)12530; idem, The Employment of Palaeo-Hebrew Characters for the Divine Names at Qumran in the Ligh t of TannaitSources, HUCA 42 (1971) 15972; idem,The Scribes of Qumran. Studies in the Early History of Jewish ScribalCustoms, with Special Reference to the Qumran Biblical Scrolls and to the Tannaitic Traditions of MassekhetSoferim, unpubl. Ph.D. diss., Brandeis University 1971 (University Microfilms, 1972 [henceforth: Siegel,Scribes ofQumran]); J. M. Oesch, Petucha und Setuma, Untersuchungen zu einer berl iefer ten Gliederung im heb rischen Textdes Alten Testament(OBO 27; Freiburg/Gttingen 1979 [henceforth: Oesch, Petuch a und Setuma]); idem,Textgliederung im Alten Testament und in den Qumranhandschriften, Henoch5 (1983) 289321 [henceforth: Oesch,Textgliederung]; various contributions in Mikra, Compend ia Rerum Iuda icarum ad Novum Testamen tum, SectionTwo, I (ed. M. J. Mulder; AssenMaastricht /Philadelphia 1988) [henceforth: Mulder, Mikra]; A. Steudel, Assemblingand Reconstructing Manuscript s, in FlintVanderKam, Fi fty Years, 5163 4 [henceforth: Steudel, Assembling]; A. D.Crown, Studies in Samaritan Scribal Practices and Manuscript His tory, IV (198387; see bibliography); A. LemairWriting and Writing Materials, ABD6 (New York 1992) 9991008; J. Ashton,The Persistence, Diffusion and Interchangeabili ty of Scribal Habits in the Ancient Near East before the Codex, unpubl. Ph.D. diss., University ofSydney, 1999 [henceforth: Ashton,Scribal Habits]; M. C. A. Korpel and J. M. Oesch, Del imitation Cri tici sm: A NewTool in Biblical Scholarship(Pericope I; Assen 2000) [henceforth: KorpelOesch, Delimi ta tion Criticism];http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/rak/jewishpap.html = Kraft, Jewishpap(an analysi s and images of early Jewish papyri); E. J.C. Tigchelaar, In Search of the Scribe of 1QS, in Pau l, Emanuel , 43952 [henceforth: Tigchelaar, The Scribe of 1QS];P. Alexander, Li teracy among Jews in Second Temple Palest ine: Reflections on t he Evidence from Qumran, Hamlet ona Hill. Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth B irthday (ed.M. F. J. Baasten and W. Th. van Peursen; Leuven 2003) 324 [henceforth: Alexander, L iteracy].


25/324

Scribal Practices and Approaches Reflected in the Texts from the Judean Desert 3

stich (25 words) in the running text, but the special meaning of this feature in this particul pericope, probably considered one unit by the scribe, still needs to be analyzed (ch.5a3).

Regarding other details, we note that the great majority of the marginal notations in thQumran scrolls are in the nature of correcting additions and not variant readings (ch.5f ), thatcertain small words and particles were often joined to other words (5a1), and that some Qumrwritings included markings in the Cryptic A script (5c3). Study of scribal practices is instructiregarding the approaches of scribes to certain types of texts (ch. 7) and about the exegeticaspects of the work of the scribes (2h). One of the characteristics of the exegetical dimensions ofscribal activity pertains to the marking of sense units within the text (5a), while another pertainsto scribal signs; more substantial exegetical activity is visible in various forms of scribaintervention in the text itself (2h).

b. Sources

The analysis pertains to all the texts from the Judean Desert, non-documentary (literary) as was documentary, with special emphasis on literary texts (inAPPENDIX 6 it is suggested that theMasada nonbiblical texts probably derived from Qumran, which if true would confirm our masource of information for this monograph as being the Qumran corpus). The texts discussed wefound at the following sites, listed from north to south: Wadi Daliyeh (strictly speaking, beyonthe Judean Desert, but published in DJD), Ketef Jericho, Qumran (Khirbet Qumran and theQumran caves), Khirbet Mird, Wadi Murabbaat, Wadi Sdeir ( Nah>al David), Nah>al H! ever(also named Seiyal in the publications), Nah>al Mishmar, Nah>al S>eelim, and Masada.

The texts found at these locations are quoted here according to their official names aninventory numbers as recorded in the latest lists, especially in DJD XXXIX (The Texts from the Judaean Desert: Indices and an Introduction to theDiscoveries in the Judaean Desert Series; ed. E.Tov, Oxford 2002). The texts were examined mainly in photographs, positives as well as thmicrofiche edition (TovPfann,Companion Volume) and sometimes in the originals. They arequoted from the critical editions, mainly DJD, but also additional editions relating to the long textsfrom cave 1,2 some texts from cave 4,3 and two texts from cave 11.4

Some scribal practices detected in the texts from the Judean Desert were developedad hoc, but more frequently they followed earlier writing traditions in the same language or script or othlanguages used in the area. For this purpose, other scribal traditions are quoted below focomparison, although direct influence can be established only in some instances. Much olddocuments are quoted in order to provide background material on individual scribal practices, su

2 1QIsaa ParryQimron, Isa iah; Burrows,The Dead Sea Scrolls, vol. 1.1QIsa b Sukenik, Dead Sea Scro ll s, together with sections of this manuscript which were published as

no. 8 in DJD I (Oxford 1955).1QpHab Burrows,The Dead Sea Scrolls, vol. 1; also: Horgan, Pesh arim.

1Q19bis (Noah) J. C. Trever, Completion of the Publ ication, RevQ 5 (196466) 3234 4.1QapGen ar AvigadYadin,Genesis Apocryphon.1QapGen ar I, IIIVIII, X, XI, XIIIXVII: M. Morgenstern, E. Qimron, D. Sivan, AbrN33 (1995) 3054.1QapGen ar II, IX, XVIIIXXII: AvigadYadin,Genesis Apocryphon.1QapGen ar XII J. Greenfield and E. Qimron, The Genesis Apocryphon Col. XII, AbrNSup 3 (1992) 7077. 1QS Burrows,The Dead Sea Scrolls, vol. 2.1QM IXIX Sukenik, Dead Sea Scro ll s.1QHa Sukenik, Dead Sea Scro ll s (in parenthesis: column numbers according to Puech, Quelques

aspects).3 4Q202, 204206, 210212. See Milik, Enoch.4 11QpaleoLeva FreedmanMathews , Leviticus; . Puech, Notes en marge de 11QPalo lvitique, le fragment

L, des fragments indits et une jarre de la grotte 11, RB 96 (1989) 16189; E. J. C. Tigchelaar,Some More Small 11Q1 Fragments, RevQ 70 (1998) 32530.

11QTa Y. Yadin,The Temple Scroll , vol s. 13 (Jerusalem 1977; Hebrew);The Temple Scroll , vols. 13(Jerusalem 1983).


26/324


as the size and ruling of columns, without assuming direct influence, for example, in the case documents written in ancient Egypt, Ugarit, and Mesopotamia. Medieval texts, such amanuscripts of MT and SP are also quoted, since these texts meticulously preserved ancientraditions.

The corpora of texts found in the Judean Desert are of a different nature, but their interndifferences are less relevant for the present analysis that focuses on scribal practices visible individual documents. For this analysis, whether or not the Qumranites were Essenes is usualimmaterial5 (in contrast to the analysis of scribal practices in ch.8a, where this hypothesis isrelevant). Most of the collections are conceived of as deposited by persons who either lived osite for an extended period (Qumran) or a brief time (most other localities). The Qumran tedepositories in caves 1, 4, and 11, containing a very large quantity of scrolls (see the lists in DJD XXXIX), were primarily meant as secret repositories for the scrolls of the Qumran community.

For most aspects discussed below, it is probably immaterial whether or not the Qumracorpus as a whole or the texts from cave 4 alone should be considered a library, a term used oftin the scholarly literature since the influential study by F. M. Cross, Jr.,The Ancient Library ofQumran, which has dominated scholarship since its first edition (Garden City, New York 1958and is consulted here in its 3rd edition (Sheffield 1995). Several studies have been written on t basis of the assumption that the Qumran collection, especially that of cave 4, represents a librare.g. K. G. Pedley, The Library at Qumran, RevQ 2 (1959) 2141, who went as far ascontemplating whether or not there ever existed an inventory of the Qumran library such as thin several ancient libraries. Likewise, the director of the University library in Bonn, V. Burdevoted a study to the Qumran corpus based on his experience as a librarian: Marginalien zBibliothek von Qumran, Libri15 (1965) 34052. However, neither the contents of the Qumrancorpus nor any external features of the caves or a community building can be adduced asupporting evidence for the assumption that cave 4 housed a library. Several Qumran caves weused as depositories for all the written material owned by the Qumran community, which mahave been stored previously in several locations in the Qumran compound itself.6 Among otherthings, it is unlikely thattefillin and mezuzot , scribal exercises, personal notes such as 4QList ofFalse Prophets ar (4Q339) and 4QList of Netinim (4Q340), an inner-Qumran communitdocument such as 4QRebukes Reported by the Overseer (4Q477), and Greek texts, would hav been kept in a library of the Qumran community (seeAPPENDIX 4). It should also be noted thatsome caves (3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10) served as temporary dwellings for individuals who left behind theutensils as well as some written material.

The documents studied are fragmentary, and therefore not all the data can be studiesatisfactorily. The best-preserved nonbiblical scrolls are 11QTa (11Q19) and several of the textsfrom cave 1 (1QM, 1QS, 1QHa, 1QpHab, 1QapGen ar). As for the biblical scrolls, 1QIsaa is theonly one that has been preserved almost in its entirety containing 54 columns in 17 sheetSubstantial remains of 1QIsa b, 4QpaleoExodm, 11QpaleoLeva, 4QNum b, 4QSama (12 Samuel),4QIsac, 4QJer a, MurXII, 11QPsa, and 11QtgJob were preserved, while the extant remains of allother scrolls are fragmentary, sometimes very fragmentary. Often a tiny inscribed piece is thonly evidence for a biblical scroll identified by its content, and/or script (e.g. in the case o4QIsahr ).

The Qumran corpus includes a few small groups of texts of a technical nature, namelytefillinandmezuzot , calendrical texts, and texts written in one of the Cryptic scripts (for all these, see ch

5 Cave 7 contains no sectarian texts at all, while caves 16 contain both sectarian and non-sectarian texts. The conten tscaves 810 are too meager for analysis. It appears that cave 11 contains almost only sectarian texts and texts that wercopied by sectarian scribes. See my study The Special Character of the Texts Found in Qumran Cave 11,Things Revea led. Stud ies in Early Jewish and Chris tian Literature in Honor of Michae l A. Stone(ed. E. Chazon and D. Satran;Supplements to JSJ; Leiden 2004), forthcoming.

6 For an account as to how these scrollsmay have reached the caves, see Stegemann, Library of Qumran,6779.


27/324


7 ). To some extent, each of these groups reflects internally similar scribal habits, but thdiscrepancies appearing within each group resemble those between other texts in the Qumracorpus.

c. Background of the documents

A description of the scribal practices reflected in the documents from the Judean Desert is moencompassing than the name of the geographic area implies. It appears that many, if not most, the literary texts found in the Judean Desert had been copied elsewhere in Israel. Therefore, tcontents and scribal practices reflected in them represent not only the persons who passethrough, lived, and wrote in the Judean Desert, but to an even greater extent the culture and scribof Palestine as a whole.7 At the present stage of research, the wider scope of the literarydocuments of the Judean Desert corpora is a mere assumption. However, it may be supported bresearch into either the content of the texts or their physical components, that is the materi(leather and papyrus), the sinews used for sewing the sheets of leather, and the ink.

Some of the letters found in the Judean Desert (Wadi Murabbaat and Nah! al H! ever)mention localities in Judea, and were written either in the area or brought there, but for thQumran texts, the largest segment of the corpora from the Judean Desert, we have no sound dawith regard to the geographic origin of texts written outside Qumran.

Furthermore, with the exception of the dated documents from Murabba>at and Nah! alH! ever, thedates of the documents also remain hypothetical, although paleography and AMS(Accelerated Mass Spectometry; carbon-14) analysis provide an ever-increasing probabiliregarding their dating.8 The latter procedure, however, has so far only been applied to a very smallnumber of texts (Bonani et al., Radio-carbon Dating; for criticisms, see Doudna, Dating; ide4Q Pesher Nahum, 67582; B. Thiering, The Date and the Order of Scrolls, 40BCE to 70CE, inSchiffman, Jerusalem Congress, 1918). The paleographical dates applied to the documents rangefrom the fourth centuryBCE to the first centuryCE for the Jericho documents, from 250BCE to 70CE for the Qumran texts,9 from 150BCE to 70CE for the Masada texts, and from 75BCE to 135CE for the texts from Wadi Murabba>at, Nah! al H! ever, and Nah! al S! eat Papyru

and the Letter Found near Yabneh-Yam, BASOR 165 (1962) 3442.11 For an initial analysis of the Cryptic A script (4QHoroscope [4Q186], 4Q249, 4Q298, 4Q317 as well as the more

fragmentary texts 4Q250, 4QMish E [4Q324c], and 4Q313 [unclassified frgs.]), see Pfann, 4Q298 and idem, 249aand 250aj: Introduction, DJD XXXVI, 51546.


28/324


documents found at other sites in the Judean Desert. The scribal practices used in the NabateaAramaic, Greek, and Latin documents from Masada, Nah! al H! ever, and Murabba>at are coveredless fully in this monograph.

At the scribal-practice level, very little distinction was made between the writing an production of biblical (sacred) and nonbiblical (nonsacred) texts (ch.7a), and therefore a combineddiscussion of the two types of texts is justified in this monograph. Throughout, the term biblicarefers to the canonical books of Hebrew/Aramaic Scripture. Even though this usage ianachronistic for the Judean Desert texts, it is made for the sake of convenience. Special attentiis given to noncanonical authoritative writings (Jubilees, Ben Sira, Enoch, as well as Qumrasectarian writings) if perchance their scribal features reveal traits in common with the canonic biblical writings. This seems to be the case with scrolls of very large dimensions (see ch.4e).When relevant, the nonbiblical 4QReworked Pentateuch is listed with the biblical texts (e.g. ch.TABLE 10).

Since the documents were written in different periods and localities, they reflect a variety scribal practices. For the present purpose, however, these different groups of documents adescribed as one large, somewhat artificial, corpus, whose common practices are described in tmain section of this monograph. At the same time, the analysis in ch.7 focuses on a few specificgroups: (a) biblical texts; (b) texts written in the paleo-Hebrew script; (c)tefillinand mezuzot ; (d)texts written on papyrus; (e) texts written in Greek; and (f) pesharim.


29/324


30/324

8 Chapter 2: Scribes

from another angle, the use of the term scribe may create confusion, especially when used in t plural. For the scribes known from rabbinic texts, soferim, were scribes of a special type who hada very specific role in the production and perpetuation of the biblical text as well as of othreligious documents. Moreover, the soferim, especially as known from rabbinic sources and thesynoptic gospels (grammatei`"), had a special place in society and they appear in the NeTestament as a unified group. Since only some of the texts found in the Judean Desert we produced locally, with probably most having been imported from elsewhere, it is very likely thsome tefillin and biblical texts from the Judean Desert were written by these soferimor their precursors. For this reason, soferim must be included in our analysis.

Scribes and soferimin ancient Israel Due to its complicated technical nature, the scribal occupation must be considered a professiorather than an occasional activity.14 Unnamed as well as identified scribes are mentioned severaltimes in Scripture. Qiryat Sefer, literally the city of the book (i.a., Josh 15:15; the site where anarchive was kept?), the earlier name of Debir, may have been the site where many such scriblived. The explanation of that name as an archive is supported by the LXX translation povl

(tw`n) grammavtwn, e.g. in Josh 15:15. On the other hand, the transliteration of the LXX in Jud1:11 Kariasswfar (MSS Bdfsz; otherMSS similarly) reflects an understanding of the name as thecity of the sofer . It is not impossible that the phrase used in 1 Chr 2:55, the families of soferim who lived at Jabez, refers to family-like guilds of scribes. As for individual scribes, 1 Chr 24mentions Shemayah son of Netanel,ywlh m rpwsh, the scribe, who was of the Levites. The best-known scribe in Scripture is Ezra, namedryhm rpws (a skilled scribe) in Ezra 7:6 and, similar toShemayah, deriving from a priestly family (his direct lineage from Aaron is specified in Ezra 74). From ancient times onwards, the connection between the function of the scribe and variouaspects of public administration is evident. Likewise, in the period to which the texts from thJudean Desert pertain, some scribes functioned as secretaries of towns.

In this period, most scribes occupied themselves with all aspects of scribal activity, that i

the copying of existing documents and literary compositions, as well as the writing odocumentary texts (such as found at Wadi Murabba>at, Nah! al H! ever, and elsewhere) and thecreative composition of new literary works. In addition, some scribes were involved in varioaspects of administrative activity. At the same time, the use ofrpwsin 11QPsa XXVII2 is ratherunique. In that scroll, David is named arpws, in the sense of an author who is also a scribe ratherthan merely a scribe, since the text focuses on his wisdom and compositions and not on hcopying of texts. On the other hand, Schams, Jewish Scribes, 1245, 2413 also considers this useof rpws to mean a scribe, basing herself on the similar characterizing of Moses as a scribe iTargum Neophyti in Num 21:18 and Deut 33:21.

From rabbinic sources we obtain a narrow picture, since they mainly record the activity scribes in the religious realm, namely, the copying of religious documents: Scripture, especial

Torah scrolls,tefillin and marriage and divorce documents (for the latter, cf.m. Git ! t ! . 7.2 [fg]btkw rpwsl wrma). These activities did not involve any creative writing which lay beyond theinterest of rabbinic sources. Therefore one should not equate the scribes ( soferim) mentioned inthe Talmud with all the scribes who were active in the period covered by rabbinic literature.

Because of the manifold activities of the scribes, their intimate knowledge of the compositionthey copied and the topics on which they wrote, scribes were usually educated and well-rea

14 For an analysi s of professional and occasional writing mentioned in Scripture and Rabbin ic literature, see especiallSchams, Jewish Scribes; see further M. Fishbane, Bibl ical Interpre tation in Ancient Israel (Oxford 1985); A. Demsky,Writing in Ancient Israel and Early Judaism, Part One: The Biblical Period, in Mulder, Mikra, 220; idem, Scribe,in EncJud14 (Jerusalem 1971) 10413; A. J. Saldarini, Scribes, ABD5 (New York 1992) 101116 provides the mostextensive collection of references and analysis.


31/324


persons. As a result, the connection between scribes and wisdom is stressed in several sourceespecially in religious literature. A scribe for whom that connection is described in great detail that depicted by Ben Sira in the early second centuryBCE in Sir 38:2439:11.15 His wisdom isdescribed in 38:24 as sofiva grammatevw" (= rpws tmkj). That scribe, one might say, the idealscribe, is portrayed as an expert in all areas of knowledge and administration. His wisdom divinely inspired, since his main source of knowledge is the law of the Most High which helhim to seek out the wisdom of the ancients and to be concerned with prophecies anproverbs (39:1). That scribe is not only a scholar and teacher, but also an administrator of thhighest level (39:4; 38:3233). Ben Sira himself was probably a scribe of this type, and Enoch similarly described (Enoch 92:1). At the same time, one should carefully distinguish between trealm of the scribe, which usually is that of a technician, and that of the wise men or intellectualas pointed out by Bickerman.16

Beyond this general background information on scribes in Palestine, for the period undediscussion very few specific details are known regarding the scribes who actually copied thdocuments found in the Judean Desert, especially since in most cases we do not know whethese documents were written. For one thing, the scribes did not record their names in the texthemselves since the custom of writing colophons had not yet been formed in Hebrew anAramaic manuscripts (an isolated wordrma, possibly indicating the remains of such a colophon,was written three lines below the end of the book of Isaiah in the last column of 1QIsaa). The onlyinformation available regarding the many aspects of scribal activity is therefore culled from ttexts themselves.17 These texts allow us to form an opinion on the collaboration between scribes(ch. 2d ), their approach to the texts from which they copied, including the degree of precisio(2g ), the materials used (3a), writing practices (ch.5), including the use of scribal marks andcorrection procedures (5c), handwriting, mistakes and correction procedures (5c2), scripts (ch.6 ),characteristic scribal features (ch.7 ), the influence of Aramaic (7f ), etc. On the possible existenceof scribal practices and schools, see ch.8a.

We know of no official qualifications required of or restrictions placed on persons who wroliterary texts, including religious texts. The only restriction known is that recorded in rabbintexts stating that religious writings (Torah scrolls,tefillin, and mezuzot ) written by a heretic ( ym), pagan ( ybkwk dbw[), informer (rswm [against his fellow-Jews to the Roman authorities]), Samaritan(ytwk), converted Jew (rmwm lary ), slave, woman, and minor were not acceptable (thus the variousopinions inb. Gitt.45b; cf.b. Menah! . 42b andSof . 1.14). Further, the writing of the divinenames in paleo-Hebrew characters in several texts from the Judean Desert, in one instance widifferent ink, may imply the involvement of special scribes (ch.5d ) employed especially forsacred purposes.

If many of the Qumran scrolls were writtenin situ, it may be considered unusual that noreference is made in the texts to any scribal activity by the members of that community, oththan for administrative purposes. However, an argument of this type referring to the mentioninof writing activities may be less relevant to the present description, and besides, it may bcontradicted by the lack of reference in the scrolls to other activities of the Qumranites, such specific types of manual work, including the date industry discovered by archeologists. ThQumran texts mention the administrative recording of the members of the Qumran communit

15 Cf. H. Stadelman, Ben S ira a ls Schrift gelehrter(WUNT 2, 6; Tbingen 1980) especially 21646 ; D. J. Harrington, TheWisdom of the Scribe according to Ben Sira, in Ideal Figu res in Ancien t Judai sm: Prof iles and Paradigms (ed. G. W.E. Nickelsburg and J. J. Collins; SCS 12; Chico, Calif. 1980) 1818.

16 E. Bickerman,The Jews in the Greek Age(Cambridge, Mass. 1988) 16176 ( Scribes and Sages), especially 163.17 More extensive information on scribes and book product ion is available for a later period covered by the documents fro

the Cairo Genizah. See especially N. Allony, Books and Their Manufacture in Mediaeval Palest ine,Shalem 4 (1984)125 (Heb.). Among other things, Allony writes about the learning of writing skills, about scripts, writing materialthe number of lines in manuscripts, the places of writing, the time needed for writing a Torah scroll (one year), and th prices paid. See also Beit-Ari, Hebrew Codicology.


32/324


sometimes by themebaqqer (e.g. 1QS V23, VI 22; 4QSd [4Q258] 3 ii3; CD XIII12), who alsowrote down in his private notebook (CD IX18) the sins committed. 4QRebukes Reported by theOverseer (4Q477) probably contains such personal remarks regarding certain individuals in tQumran community. In the Qumran texts, the sofer is mentioned a few times, such as in 11QPsa XXVII2 noted above. Further, in the Aramaic Enoch fragments, Enoch is named rps arp , adistinguished scribe (4QEnGiants b ar [4Q530] 2 ii+ 8 14), and in the Ethiopic and Greekfragments of Enoch he is likewise named a scribe (1 Enoch 12:4; 15:1). Finally, the fragmenta4QNarrative B (4Q461) 2 includes the a word soferim without any context. Writing was also anessential part of the warfare depicted in the War Scroll which records in detail the inscriptioninscribed on the standards and engraved on the trumpets and shields to be used in the future waWriting is mentioned also in 4QJuba (4Q216) IV6 (Jub 1:27) and 4QMMTe (4Q394) 1417 ii2.On the other hand, Scham, Jewish Scribes, 25960 considers the lack of references in the Qumrantexts to the copying of scrolls to be intentional since, in her opinion, the members of thcommunity did not assign any special importance to the actual writing and copying of scrolls (260).

Information on scribes and scribal activity in rabbinic sources Scattered information regarding the writing of Scripture,tefillin, mezuzot , marriage and divorcedocuments, as well as about scribes and soferim, is found in various places in rabbinic literature.These writing instructions pertaining to very specific details are also combined in a few smacompilations dealing with various topics, such asb. Menah! . 29b32b,b. Meg. passim, b. Shabb.103a105a, andb. B. Bat.13b14b. The best organized group of such instructions is probablyfound in y. Meg.1.71b72a and in the later compilation Massekhet Soferim(see Higger, MsktSwprym). Although this tractate is post-Talmudic (ninth century), it is based on Massekhet Sefer Torah (see Higger, Minor Treatises) as well as on several early sources, and thus preservestraditions which go back to the Talmudic period. The rabbinic instructions pertain to such matteas writing materials, the preparation of leather, scribes, measurements of sheets, columns, line

and margins, correction of errors, the writing of divine names, and the storage and reading ofscrolls.18 The data contained in these sources is very valuable as background information for thcorpora from the Judean Desert, as long as it is remembered that the rabbinic descriptions an prescriptions refer mainly to the writing of religious texts, at a later period, and in circles whi partially overlapped with the circles that produced the texts found in the Judean Desert. Thu probably only the proto-Masoretic texts from various sites in the Judean Desert (except fQumran) and sometefillinandmezuzot (ch.7c) derived from the same circles as those described inthe Talmudic literature.

Scribes are known from rabbinic sources by various appellations, especially with reference the writing of Scripture and religious documents:

rpws, sofer . This term, the most frequently used appellation, refers to a person who was basically independent,

but who sometimes worked exclusively for a certain Rabbi (e.g. Joh! anan the sofer [secretary, more or less] ofRabban Gamliel mentioned in y. Sanh.1.18d andb. Sanh.11b). This term also referred to a scribe working on cityaffairs (atm rpws, the scribe of the city [b. B. Bat.21a]).

btwk (copyist), with the connotation calligrapher. rlbl , a loan-word from Greek (libellavrio" or liblavrio" [P.Yad. 15, 17, 18 and 2022]), itself a loan-word from

Latin (librarius), e.g. m. Pe


33/324


It stands to reason that literary texts were copied from writtenVorlagen. There is no reason toassume that scribes who knew their biblical texts well wrote them from memory. Indeed, accordito the prescriptions in rabbinic literature, scribes were forbidden to copy Scripture without a tein front of them, even if they knew the whole Bible by heart, in order to secure precision copying (b. Meg.18b and parallels).

The prescriptions of the rabbis regarding the copying of sacred texts were not followed by ascribes in Israel. In light of this situation, it is not impossible that some scribes wrote fromdictation19 or that mass production (dictating to several scribes at the same time) took place, buthere is no evidence supporting this view. Phonetic interchange of letters as evidenced in manQumran texts does not necessarily prove that they were written by dictation, since any scribcopying from a document could make such mistakes or change the orthography, consciously not.20

The writing of Scripture andtefillin was considered so important by the rabbis that scribes ofsuch texts were not supposed to interrupt their work, even for the duty of prayer ( y. Shabb. 1.3b; y. Ber.1.3b; y. Bikk.3.65c), let alone for less significant occasions or tasks.

In rabbinic literature, there are some references to scribes who produced multiple copies. Thuaccording tob. B. Bat.14a, R. Huna wrote seventy Torah scrolls and R. Ami 400 scrolls.

Soferim The term soferimis used in rabbinic literature with two different meanings, the equivalent beingthe use of either a lower or an upper case letter. The soferimwere individual copyists, as portrayed in the post-Talmudic tractate bearing that name, but they were also known as a moror-less organized group of scribes,Soferim(henceforth referred to with a lower case letter as soferim) with authoritative legal capacities. Scholars are not in agreement on the nature of thes soferimwho carried out legal functions, but only some aspects of this discussion pertain to th present analysis. According to some scholars, these soferim functioned as pivotal personages in acertain era and at a later stage also constituted a political power.21

In rabbinic writings, from the Mishna onwards, these soferimare mentioned as authoritativescribes and teachers to whom a number of teachings andhalakhot are ascribed. As a result, the soferimare considered to have been influential figures in Israel from the time of Ezra to the seconcenturyCE, both in rabbinic tradition and in modern scholarship. Among other things, they armentioned in the New Testament as grammatei`" and as iJerogrammatei`" (Josephus, Bell. Jud . VI5 3 292). The latter term shows that these persons dealt mainly with religious writings, and we possibly of priestly descent (indeed, most of the soferim whose genealogy is known were priests).

19 Thus with regard to 1QIsaa: M. Burrows, Orthography, Morphology, and Syntax of the St. Marks Manuscript, JBL68(1949) 195211, especially 196; H. M. Orlinsky, Studies in the St. Marks Isaiah Manuscript, JBL69 (1950) 14966,especially 165.

20 Thus already E. Hammershaimb, reacting to the theories regarding 1QIsaa: On the Method Ap plied in the Copying ofManuscripts in Qumran,VT9 (1959) 41518.21 Note the remarks of Ginsburg in his description of the development of the Masorah: The labors of the Massorites ma be regarded as a later development and continuat ion of the earlier work which was carried on by the Sopherim ( yrpws,grammatei ") = the doctors and au thorized interpreters of the Law soon after the return of the Jews from the Babyloni scaptivity (comp. Ezra VII 6; Neh. VIII 1 &c.). See Ginsburg, Int roduction, ch. XI; the quote is from p. 287. At a differentlevel, E. Schrer, A History o f the Jewish People in the Time o f Jesus Christ , Second Division (New York 1891) I.306 79 devoted 75 pages to what he called Scribism. The view that there was a period of the soferim was suggested forthe first time in scholarship by R. Nachman Krochmal in his book Moreh Nevukhe Ha-zeman(edited posthumously b yL. Zunz and published in 1851; quoted by Urbach, below). Along with others, E. E. Urbach wrote against this view The Derasha as a Basis of the Halakha and the Problem of the Soferim,Tarbiz 27 (1958) 16682. For a summary on theviews expressed on the soferim and for much bibliography, see H. Mantel, TheSoferim, inSociety and Religion in theSecond Temple Period(ed. M. Aviyo na; Jerusalem/Tel Aviv 1983) 358 (Heb.). Among these stud ies, see especially M.H. Segal, The Promulgation of the Authori tative Text of the Hebrew Bible, JBL 72 (1953) 3548; M. Greenberg, TheStabilization of the Text of the Hebrew Bible, Reviewed in the Light of the Biblical Materials from the Judean Desert JAOS 76 (1956) 15767.


34/324


The term soferim involves the combined activities of the copying of texts, especially of Scripturand other sacred documents, and an intimate knowledge of the documents, and it is often difficto decide which nuance of the term is intended. This difficulty probably reflects the fact that mo soferim were skilled in both aspects of their profession.

Various aspects of the soferimmentioned in rabbinic literature are of direct relevance to the present analysis. The soferimwere actively involved in the transmission of Hebrew/AramaicScripture, and while, on the one hand, they had a purely passive task in connection with th preservation of the biblical text, they also occasionally made corrections in the text, if the rabbintraditions are to be trusted. Even if these traditions are incorrect, the very assumption that th soferimmade corrections (tiqqun soferim) was thus tolerated. It should be admitted that the presumed precision of the soferimin the transmission of Scripture cannot be tallied easily with thechanges inserted by them, and this argument possibly militates against the assumption of thtrustworthiness of the tradition regarding the changes in the text introduced by the soferim. Themost pervasive group of such changes made by the soferim is that of the so-calledtiqqun soferim,the corrections of the scribes (Sifre Numbers 84 [on Num 10:35]; Mek.Exod 15:7 [Shirata 6]; Midrash Tanh! uma to Exod 15:7 [ Beshallah! 16]). These corrections involve a number ofchanges in MT (eight to eighteen according to different traditions), mainly of euphemistic naturOther changes ascribed to the soferimare the five omissions of the soferim, referring to theomission of thewaw conjunctive.b. Ned.37b also mentions themiqra< soferim, the reading ofthe soferim, relating to three words in Scripture. The examples are not explained, but they maindicate the beginning of vocalization, instituted by the soferim.22 For all these groups of changes,see Tov,TCHB, 647.

b. Learning scribal skills

Little is known regarding the training of scribes in the biblical and post-biblical period. Thaforementioned family-like guilds of scribes (1 Chr 2:55) possibly underwent some training. Muinformation about the learning process of scribes comes from other cultures in the ancient NeEast,23 but it is unclear to what extent parallels may be drawn to ancient Israelite practices.

The texts from the Judean Desert reflect different levels of scribal skills, visible not only in thdegree of carefulness of the handwriting and its transmission, but also in the knowledge of aadherence to certain scribal conventions. Many, if not most, non-documentary (literary) texwere written by skilled hands, while letters were often written in irregular scripts. The differen between the various levels of scribal skill is reflectedinter alia in the well-written contracts andletters from Nah! al H! ever and Wadi Murabba>at as opposed to the irregularly writtensignatures of the writers of the letters and the witnesses. Seei.a. Mur papLetter from Beit-Mashiko to Yeshua b. Galgula (Mur 42; DJDII, 155; illustr.4 below); XH! ev/SeDeed of Sale Aar (XH! ev/Se 7, DJD XXVII, 19); XH! ev/Se papDeed of Sale C ar (XH! ev/Se 8a; DJD XXVII,34), 5/6H! ev 4446 ( JDS3, pls. 7678).

Some scribes, certainly some of the scribes of the Qumran texts, copied sacred as well anonsacred texts (ch.7a), while others, especially in temple circles, must have specialized in thewriting of sacred texts. In rabbinic circles, those specializing in sacred texts copied biblical texts

22 At a different level, rabbinic literature mentions severalhalakhot , especially on matters of purity, which are described as yrpws yrbd, dibr soferim.These dibr soferimrefer only tohalakhot determined by previous generations, which hadalready become authoritative by the time of the Mishna (e.g. m. Kel.13.7;m. T ! oh. 4.7;m. T ! ebul Yom 4.6).

23 See B. Landsberger, Scribal Concepts of Education, inCity Invincible (ed. C. H. Kraeling and R. M. Adams; Chicago1960) 94102; W. Hallo, New Viewpoints on Cuneiform Literature, IEJ 12 (1962) 1326, especially 225; R. J.Williams, Scribal Training in Ancient Egypt, JAO S 92 (1972) 21421; H. Blanck, Das B uch in der A ntike (Munich1992) 329.


35/324


well astefillin, mezuzot , and marriage and divorce documents. Some scribes worked independentlywhile others were engaged by specific Rabbis, a city, or the Sanhedrin.

Scribes were introduced to their trade during the course of a training period, in which thelearned writing and the various scribal procedures connected with it (such as writing at a fixdistance below ruled lines and in columns; the division of a composition into sense units; thtreatment of the divine names; the correction of mistakes, etc.). Furthermore, scribes had to masvarious technical skills relating to the material on which they wrote, the use of writing implemenand the preparation of ink.

The abecedaries (lists of letters of the alphabet) found at Qumran,24 Murabba>at,25 Masada(Mas ostraca 606, 608), and at many additional sites dating to the First and Second Temp periods26 probably witness to such a learning process for scribes. Lemaire claimed that sucabecedaries deriving from the First Temple period point to the existence of scribal schools, anthis argument may be valid also with regard to Qumran.27

A learning process is probably also reflected in such scribal exercises as 4QExercitium CalamA (4Q234), 4QExercitium Calami B (4Q360), and 4QExercitium Calami C (4Q341; see illustr.2)containing lists of names and other words. Lists of names also served as scribal exercises in othenvironments; see, e.g. H. Harrauer and P. J. Sijpesteijn, Neue Texte aus dem antiken Unterricht(Vienna 1985) items 4360, 65. 4QExercitium Calami C (4Q341) contains a sequence of propnames starting with the lettermem, a series of words, mainly proper names, in alphabetical order,frombet to zayin, as well as sequences of single letters. A similar mixture of exercises is found inthe abecedary published by . Puech (see n. 26). 4QExercitium Calami A (4Q234) contains worwritten in three different directions. Similar exercises were listed by Y. Yadin and J. Naveh Masada I , 614 (Writing Exercises and Scribbles). Similar to 4Q341, Ostraca 608 and 609 froMasada are fragments of two series of personal names in alphabetical order.

Certain Qumran documents, containing very inelegant and irregular handwriting, werconsidered by some scholars to have been written by apprentice scribes. Thus Milik, Enoch, 141considered 4QEna ar (4Q201) to be a school-exercise copied by a young scribe from the masterdictation. P. W. Skehan considered 4QPsx (4Q98g) to be a practice page written frommemory.28 J. T. Milik suggested that 4QDanSuz? ar (4Q551) was written by an apprenticescribe,29 and . Puech surmised that 4QBirth of Noaha ar (4Q534) was written by a child ( DJD XXXI, 135). Likewise, many of the calendrical texts and Mishmarot (Temple Watches) are poorly inscribed with irregular layout of the lines: 4QMish B (4Q323), 4QMish C (4Q3244QMish G (4Q329), 4QMish H (4Q329a), 4QMish I (4Q330), 4QCal Doc D (4Q394 12Furthermore, we cautiously suggest that 4QGenf , containing Gen 48:1-11 and written with anunskilled hand, also constitutes a scribal exercise, as this fragment was written on a single sheewith no signs of sewing on the right side. For a similar type of exercise from Mesopotamia, see Hallo, who noted that two small tablets from Assur . . . show extracts, not just from two or thr24 See ostracon 3 from Khirbet Qumran published by E. Eshel in DJD XXXVI, pl. XXXIV (see illustr.5 below). Two

additi onal abecedaries, described as deriv ing from the first centuryBCE, are displayed in the Israel Museum as Qumran?.25 Some of the abecedaries from Murabba>at were written on leather (Mur 10B, 11), while others were inscribed on sherds

(Mur 73, 7880), all published in DJD II.26 See . Puech, Abcdaire et liste alphabt ique de noms hbreux du dbut des IIe S. A.D., RB87 (1980) 11826; A.

Lemaire, Les coles et la formation de la Bible dans lancien Isral(OBO 39; Fribourg/Gttingen 1981) 732; M.Haran, On the Diffusion of Literacy and Schools in Ancient Israel,VTSup 40 (1988) 8195; J. Renz and W. Rllig, Handbuch der al thebri schen Epigraphik 2 (Darmstadt 1995) 225; W. Nebe, Alphabets, Encyclopedia D SS , 1.18 20.

27 Lemaire, Les coles, 733. Additional, internal, evidence for the existence of a Qumran scribal practice, referring toscribal traits common to certain documents, is analyzed in ch.7a.

28 P. W. Skehan, Gleanings from Psalm Texts from Qumran, in Mlanges bibl iques et or ien taux en lhonneur de M. Hen ri Cazelles (ed. A. Caquot and M. Delcor; AOAT 212; Neukirchen/Vluyn 1981) 43952 (439).

29 J. T. Milik, Daniel et Susanne Qumrn? in De la Trah au Messie(ed. M. Carrez et al.; Paris 1981) 33759,especially 355.


36/324


compositions, but from ten different series, all of them identifiable as standard books in the neAssyrian stream of tradition.30 Since the compositions are excerpted in exactly the same order on both clay tablets, Hallo considered them exercise tablets. A large group of such exercises wcollected by HarrauerSijpesteijn (see previous paragraph).

Other aspects of the training process of members of the Qumran community, especially thstudy of the Law and of the community rites were described by Lemaire based on descriptions Josephus and those in the Qumran Rules.31

c. Production of scrolls in the Judean Desert?

It is difficult to ascertain how many of the texts found in the Judean Desert were actual produced locally, that is, both their physical preparation and the copying of the manuscriptUndoubtedly, at least some leather scrolls were produced locally (as will be provable in the futu by way of DNA analysis of scrolls in comparison with that of local animals, both contemporaand present), but at present this assumption cannot be ascertained. Also unascertainable whether papyrus was produced locally (at Ein Feshkha or elsewhere in Israel) or imported froEgypt (ch.3a).

Qumran.If it could be proven that locus 30 at Qumran served as a room in which documentwere written (a scriptorium in medieval terminology),32 the assumption of a Qumran scribal practice would receive welcome support. However, the reliability of the evidence pointing to texistence of such a scriptorium is questionable.33 Beyond the archeological relevance of locus 30,most scholars now believe, on the basis of the content of the scrolls, that some, many, or all of tdocuments found at Qumran were copied locally (ch.8a2).

30 W. Hallo, New Viewpoints, (see n. 23) 1326; the quo te is from pp. 223.31 Lemaire, Lenseignement. For parallels in rabbin ic literature, see S. Safrai, E ducation and the Study of the Torah,

Safrai, Jewish People, 94570; P. Alexander, How Did the Rabbis Learn Hebrew? in Horbury, Hebrew Study, 7189,especially 7882.

32 Thus the majority of scholars ever since the descript ion by R. de Vaux, Larchologie et les manuscrit s de la Mer Morte(London 1961) 236; idem, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrol ls(The Schweich Lectures of the British Academy;London 1973) 2933; see also R. Reich, A No te on the Function of Room 30 (the Scriptorium) at Khirbet Qumran JJS 46 (1995) 15760.

33 In this room, archeologists found a 5-meter-long table, two small tables, a few small benches fixed to the wall, anseveral inkwells (cf. photograph PAM 42.865), which were situated either in this room or on a second floor whicaccording to some scholars was situated above this room. See HumbertChambon, Fouilles de Khirbet Qumrn, pls.11420; M. Broshi, Scriptorium, Encyclopedia DSS , 2.831. However, doubts were raised with regard to thisidentification. Several scholars have claimed that the table was too low (70 cm) for writing, or that in that perioscribes did not use tables for writing, see B. M. Metzger, The Furniture of the Scriptorium at Qumran, RevQ1 (1958)50915; K. G. Pedley, The Library at Qumran, RevQ2 (1959) 2141, especially 35; K. W. Clark, The Posture of theAncient Scribe, BA26 (1963) 6372; Ashton,Scribal Habits, 57. This claim was also made by A. Lemaire,Lenseignement, especially 199, who suggested that this room was the center of the intellectual life of the communitmembers. The most detai led arguments against the assumption of a scriptorium were provided by N. Go lb. According tGolb, the fact that no remnants of scrolls were found in the room also proves that it was not used for the purpose owriting: The Problem of Origin and Identification of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 124 (1980) 124;Who Hid the Dead Sea Scrolls? BA 48 (1985) 6882; Khirbet Qumran and the Manuscripts of the JudaeanWilderness: Observations on the Logic of Their Investigation, JNES 49 (1990) 10314; idem,The DSS. Before Golb,similar doubts, though in less detail, had been voiced by H. E. del Medico, Lnigme des manuscr it s de la Mer Morte(Paris 1957); K. H. Rengstorf, Hirbe t Qumrn und die Bibl io thek vom Toten Meer(Studia Delitzschiana 5; Stuttgart1960). Golb s theory was refuted in detail by F. Garca Martnez and A. S. van der Woude, A Gron ingen Hypothes iof Qumran Origins and Early History, RevQ 14 (1990) 52141, but the doubts regarding the relevance of the artifactsfound at locus 30 remain. For more recent analyses, see Wise,Thunder in Gemini, especially 120; F. Rohrhirsch,Wissenschaftstheorie und Qumran: die Geltungsbegrundungen von Ausssagen in der Biblischen Archologie am Beispiel von Chirbet Qumran und En Feschcha (NTOA 32; Freiburg/Gttingen 1996). The view of P. H. E. Donceel-Vote, according to whom this room contained couches for reclining, has not been accepted by other scholarsCoenaculum: La salle ltage dulocus 30 Khirbet Qumrn sur la Mer Morte, in Banquets dOrient(ed. R.Gyselen; Res Orientales 4; Bures-sur-Yvette 1992) 6184. As a result, it is still unknown in which position thwriting was executed; most probably scribes were seated either on a bench or on the ground, while holding the sheet oa board on their knees, similar to the writing position of Egyptian scribes.


37/324


Stegemann, Library of Qumran, 515 holds a maximalistic view on this issue, assuming thatmost Qumran scrolls were written on site. According to him, one of the main occupations of tQumran community was the preparation of leather for the writing and mass-production of writttexts. These were, in turn, offered for sale to the outside world, and Stegemann pinpoints t places in the community buildings in which the scrolls were manufactured, stored, and offered sale.34 Golb,The DSS(see n. 33), expressing a minimalist view, claimed that none of the Qumrandocuments was written locally (Golb did not express himself with regard to other documents frothe Judean Desert).

As a result, there is no consensus regarding where the Qumran documents were copied, bsince most scholars believe that at least some, if not many, of the texts from Qumran were writtlocally (see ch.8a with regard to the possibility of a Qumran scribal practice), it remains correct torefer to the texts found at Qumran as the Qumran corpus, as long as the necessary reservations kept in mind.

Masada.There is no reason to believe that any of the Masada texts were penned at Masaditself, even though the Zealots and presumably also the Essenes remained at Masada long enouto have embarked upon such activity. On the other hand, there is apparently some evidence

tanning of hides at Masada (Netzer, Masada III , 6345) which could imply some scribal activity.Furthermore, some scribal exercises were mentioned in b above. However, probably none of thisevidence is relevant to our evaluation of the literary texts found at Masada which were probabnot produced there.

It is probable that the only writing performed at Masada pertains to the Hebrew, Aramaic, anGreek ostraca inscribed before the destruction of the fortress, and to Latin ostraca and some Gre papyri inscribed during the Roman occupation. Other papyrus and leather texts may have beimported (for an analysis, see Cotton and Geiger, Masada I , 12).

Other sites.A similar type of reasoning applies to the texts found at the other sites in theJudean Desert. Few scholars have claimed that texts were actually written in Wadi Murabba>a Nah! al H! ever, or Wadi Sdeir.

In short, it appears that the scribes of the Judean Desert texts remain as anonymous today identity and origin as they were two generations ago. However, while a generation ago the corpof Qumran documents and their scribes were identified with the Qumran community, this claimnot made today, although undoubtedly a number of texts (one third of the texts found there? [c8a2]) were copied by that community. By the same token, the documents found at Masadshould not be identified with the people who occupied that site. All these documents, includinthe letters found at Nah! al H! ever and Wadi Murabba>at, reflect the work of scribes from all ofIsrael, possibly including some local scribes.

d. Characteristic features of in